Agenda, decisions and minutes

          Resolved: that the minutes of the meetings held on 24 September 2019 and 6 November 2019 be agreed as accurate records of those meetings.

1.1    Timothy Andrew (Scrutiny Manager) informed the Committee that – further to the discussion regarding the refuse service budget at the previous meeting – a clarification had been added to the minutes of the meeting on 24 September.

1.2    Resolved: that the minutes of the meetings held on 24 September 2019 and 6 November 2019 be agreed as accurate records of those meetings.

2.1    Councillor Ingleby declared a non-prejudicial interest in relation to item six as a Director of Lewisham Homes.

There are none.

3.1       There were none.

Resolved: that the report be noted.

4.1    Fiona Colley (Director of Communications and Strategy) introduced the report – the following key points were noted:

·         The report focused most closely on the communications budget – because that was where the most significant changes were taking place.

·         The service had made significant cuts over the past few years.

·         The Committee had requested that the report should include some information about the trial of the shared service with LB Lambeth. A trial was carried out in 2016 – starting with a shared head of service.

·         It had been hoped that the shared service would save money – with the potential for skills developed in the service to provide a future source of income.

·         The trial ended in January 2017 - it saved £50k. However – overall it was not a success. It was reported that the arrangement resulted in a lack of leadership and management attention.

·         Additional resources had been added to the communications budget in 2018-19 in order to enable the migration of the website and to pay for software licenses. Future support for the website would be provided by the shared IT service.

·         In 2019-20 additional funds were provided in order to increase staffing in the communications team. It was recognised that previous cuts had been too deep and that additional staff members were needed to meet the level of service required by Council departments.

·         Temporary posts were put in place – to support change and transformation projects across the Council – as well as marketing support for delivery of priorities in the new corporate strategy. This was particularly needed for those projects that required a high level of community engagement (including the Democracy Review and the public health approach to violence prevention).

·         She and the new Head of Communications had been meeting with senior officers and cabinet members as well as the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny – in order to understand expectations and to inform a wide ranging review of the service.

·         Comments that had been made at scrutiny committees had been taken on board – for example that communications was not strategic enough and that it did not represent councillors’ priorities.

·         She had also spent time with the team to see how it was working. A number of visits had also been carried out to other boroughs to see how their communications teams were set up.

·         Detailed consideration had been given to the findings of the Democracy Review – and the new corporate strategy. It was understood that councillors wanted to engage more effectively with residents – particularly the ‘seldom heard’.

·         There was also a new focus on campaigning for positive change and investment into the borough in order to support the Council’s ambitious aims for the borough.

·         To deliver this work- a set of communications objectives had been created (as set out in the report).

·         Some improvements to communications had taken place – but there was still work to do. The team was currently in the midst of a restructure - to align  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Resolved: a) that the Committee would take part in a pilot of the commercialisation training being developed by officers; b) that a further update on the implementation of the new ‘Lewisham Way’ would return to the Committee in the next municipal year (with a specific emphasis on progress – including relevant examples - that had been made in developing the Council’s commercial culture).

5.1    Adam Bowles (Director of Organisational Development and Human Resources) introduced the report – the following key points were noted:

·         The report followed on from the update by Katherine Nidd on income generation and commercialisation at the last meeting.

·         It outlined the development of the new ‘Lewisham Way’ behaviours for managers and training being developed for employees to support commercialisation.

·         The ‘Lewisham Way’ behavioural framework had been in place for 15 years. It was being refreshed to take account of changes over that period.

·         Officers drew on: relevant research; sessions with cabinet members; workshops with staff; the findings of the democracy review and feedback from the staff survey to inform the development of the renewed Lewisham Way.

·         The new Chief Executive had decided to carry out a further round of engagement before finalising the new framework.

·         It was intended that the new behaviours would be embedded in the Council’s performance management and human resources processes and policies (from induction, to hiring processes and performance management).

·           A number of new imperatives relating to commercialisation had been included in the new behavioural framework, including: ‘create and innovate’ – ‘measure and evaluate’ – ‘think broadly and find solutions’ (which had previously only included the impetus to ‘think broadly’) and – ‘maximise value’ which had previously been ‘maximise public value’.

·           The intention was to create new training processes relating to each of the new behaviours. In some cases, however, the training would relate to a number of the behaviours.

·           Courses would be developed for senior managers and for group managers.

·           The “leaders” course would be based on case studies and would focus on strategic approach to commercialisation.

·           The course for group managers would be longer and more in depth. It would be delivered in partnership between training providers and council officers in the strategic procurement and commercialisation team.

5.2    Adam Bowles responded to questions from the Committee – the following key points were noted:

·         It was recognised that leadership was important to embedding a commercial mindset in the Council. It was also important that people at all levels recognised their own capacity to develop new ideas and effect change.

·         There were three ‘linking words’ which formed part of the new Lewisham Way: ‘changing lives’ – ‘working together’ and ‘maximising value’.

·         Culture change in organisations took many years – and was difficult to do successfully.

·         Not everyone was going to be trained on every element of the new behaviours straight away. Specific training was being developed on commercialisation.

5.3    In Committee discussions – the following key points were also noted:

·         It was clear from the work carried out by the Committee to date that the Council’s approach to commercialisation had to be led from the top.

·         It was important that the Council’s approach to commercialisation continued to reference social value.

·         Members would welcome the opportunity to be further involved in reviewing the training (and determining whether it might be helpful for other Councillors to partake in it).

5.4    Councillor Amanda de Ryk addressed the Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Resolved: that the report be noted, with reference to the alarms and concerns raised during the discussion.

6.1    Selwyn Thompson (Director of Financial Services) provided an overview of the key points in the report.

6.2    Selwyn Thompson and David Austin (Acting Chief Finance Officer) responded to questions from the Committee – the following key points were noted:

·         It was expected that the financial settlement for local government would be announced in January. It had been delayed by the general election.

·         Councils’ working assumption was that the spending announced by the chancellor in September 2019 would be followed through until next year.

·         The Council had advanced a loan facility to Lewisham Homes for its housing acquisition programme. However, Lewisham Homes was currently using its reserves to acquire the new homes.

·         Indications from government were that that funding would continue for the ‘Troubled Families’ programme. If the funding was discontinued it would create a budget gap of a million pounds and there would have to be a review of which parts of the programme the Council should continue and where the funding should come from.

·         Pressures in children’s services remained. Funding for next year would be made available from the additional social care grant.

·         It was assumed that the government had recognised that there was a funding gap for social care – and that the future funding settlement for local government would reflect this.

·         Not all of the overspending in the children and young people directorate related to social care (a proportion was for transport – and troubled families).

·         Some of the overspend would have to be met from reserves.

·         Some proposals for commercialisation included a ‘stretch’ – to push services to challenge their ways of working.

·         A number of processes were in place to monitor and manage costs in areas that were overspending.

·         There were six years in which the Council used its reserves to balance its budget (averaging £3.5m a year). More than £20m of the reserves were used in this time.

·         Council tax collection tended to improve toward the end of the year.

·         The capital programme was revised towards the end of the year. By the end of last year 82% of the revised budget was spent.

·         The capital fund for the general fund was expected to spend closer to its revised budget than the housing revenue account. Some elements of the housing programme were taking longer to implement than had been anticipated but it was expected that the programme would accelerate next year.

·         There were not significant implications on the general fund from the delay in the delivery of the housing programme.

6.3    In Committee discussions – the following key points were also noted:

·         Members expressed concern about the remaining gap in children’s services following the ‘once off’ injection of additional funds.

·         Concerns were raised about the underachievement of income from commercialisation proposals in the environment division.

·         Members asked about the condition of the Council’s reserves (officers agreed to provide an update on the previous briefing).

6.4    Resolved: that the report be noted, with reference to the alarms and concerns raised during the discussion.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1    The Committee noted that the draft budget was the only item on the agenda for the next meeting. Members were also reminded about the budget briefing on 13 January – as well as the meeting that had been arranged with officers from the London Borough of Waltham Forest – to discuss commercialisation and culture change.

8.1       There were none.